<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2017 (7) TMI 1438 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305559</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, directing the exclusion of certain comparables for transfer pricing adjustments and allowing the deduction of interest on an unsecured loan. The Tribunal excluded specific comparables for functional dissimilarity and lack of segmental data, following precedents and guidelines. Additionally, it upheld the assessee&#039;s argument that the interest on the unsecured loan was for business purposes, relying on relevant legal decisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Dec 2022 10:40:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=698354" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 1438 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305559</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, directing the exclusion of certain comparables for transfer pricing adjustments and allowing the deduction of interest on an unsecured loan. The Tribunal excluded specific comparables for functional dissimilarity and lack of segmental data, following precedents and guidelines. Additionally, it upheld the assessee&#039;s argument that the interest on the unsecured loan was for business purposes, relying on relevant legal decisions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305559</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>